openerp-community team mailing list archive

[Pedro Manuel Baeza Romero <pedro.baeza@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi, Fabien, thanks for pointing out the problems with runbot. I'm not sure
who added this branch and if they are correct, and I'm not very familiar
with runbot, but I can check it. Let's wait if someone know about.

Is there any documentation for runbot, naming conventions and so on?

Regards.


2013/10/24 Fabien Pinckaers <fp@xxxxxxxxxxx>

> IMHO, the emergency for OCB branches is to fix bugs that have been
> introduced in these branches.
>
> I am not sure if it's tracking the right branches, but it looks like the
> OCB branches are red on runbot:
>   http://runbot.openerp.com/ocb.html
>
> Also, I would suggest every contribution to follow the runbot naming
> convention so that feature branches are also tested. This simplifies the
> merge proposal review a lot because you can:
>   - test functionalities online
>   - check that the branch is still green
>
> The rule we use for official modules is to never merge a branch that
> breaks automated tests.
>
> On 10/23/2013 07:28 AM, Quentin THEURET wrote:
> > Le 23/10/2013 01:03, Nhomar Hernández a écrit :
> >> Hello.
> > Hello,
> >>
> >> In the las days, we are seeing a really big increase in the proposal
> >> to include new branchs/modules on the Community / OCA branches.
> >>
> >> It is one of the best moments of the community, we must continue in
> >> this way.
> > I'm happy to see that. It proves that community has a good future !
> >
> >> BTW, when thing start to become big, we need to act fast, then, I
> >> propose that the inclusion of Modules/Branches should be followed by
> >> an explanation in a correct way, in the MP or in the Commit Message
> >> .... or in the OCA site </bestoption I think>
> > I think it's a good way to document all new proposals and know why we
> > include this module in this project.
> >
> >>
> >> But as everybody know the "Correct" way can be subjective, to avoid
> >> this subectivity, I propose use a "Format" already known may be
> >> modigied with our reality, it is the format that the Python Foundation
> >> use:
> >>
> >> Here an example really new:
> >>
> >> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0453/
> > I read this. But, who should write these documents ? I don't think that
> > the community has time to write these things. May be some developers
> > will develop their own branches to avoid to write these documents before
> > asking for a merge. And we could lost some good modules…
> > We shouldn't make the new comers afraid because of that.
> >
> > The format to respect is IMHO too complicated according to our
> > community. The OpenERP community is not larger as Python community… If
> > the community is agree with this concept, we should make a simplest
> > "format".
> >
> >> Before end I just want to say it is just an Idea, if we have a
> >> agreement, We can invest more time in investigate more deeply, what
> >> Tools/Concepts/Formats/Process should be involved, and share with you
> >> our conclusions.
> >
> > I let other community members to give their point of view, because I
> > think it's an important thing but we can't made a mistake on this if we
> > want that all of us (and new comers) respect this "format".
> >
> > Regards,
> >
>
>
> --
> Fabien Pinckaers
> CEO OpenERP
> Chaussée de Namur 40
> B-1367 Grand-Rosière
> Belgium
> Phone: +32.81.81.37.00
> Fax: +32.81.73.35.01
> Web: http://openerp.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
> Post to     : openerp-community@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>